23 novembre 2020 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

CIA awards intel community’s cloud contract to several vendors

WASHINGTON — The Central Intelligence Agency has awarded its new multivendor cloud contract to a few companies, the spy organization confirmed Friday.

Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, IBM and Oracle all confirmed to C4ISRNET they had been awarded the CIA's Commercial Cloud Enterprise contract, which will serve as the intelligence community's cloud environment. NextGov, which first broke the news, reported Google as an additional winner.

The CIA declined to confirm specific vendors to C4ISRNET.

“We are excited to work with the multiple industry partners awarded the Intelligence Community (IC) Commercial Cloud Enterprise (C2E) Cloud Service Provider (CSP) contract and look forward to utilizing, alongside our IC colleagues, the expanded cloud capabilities resulting from this diversified partnership,” CIA spokesperson Chelsea Robinson said.

The CIA declined to provide the contract value, though contract documents obtained by NextGov in 2019 stated it could be valued in the “tens of billions.” The draft request for proposals, released in February 2020 and obtained by C4ISRNET, was considering a 15-year performance period, a five-year base and two five-year options.

The C2E contract is a follow-on award to the intel community's Commercial Cloud Services contact. AWS was the sole provider for that contract, which was worth $600 million.

“We are honored to continue to support the intelligence community as they expand their transformational use of cloud computing. Together, we're building innovative solutions across all classification levels that deliver operational excellence and allow for missions to be performed faster and more securely,” an AWS spokesperson said.

A spokesperson for Microsoft, which won the Defense Department's single-award, controversial Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure cloud contract, said the company was “eager” to work with the intel community.

“We applaud the intelligence community in advancing its cloud strategy to the next phase in order to take advantage of the latest commercially available cloud technologies,” the AWS spokesperson said.

Jay Bellisimo, IBM's general manager for the U.S. public and federal market, said that the company “is proud to further its collaboration with the U.S. federal government.”

https://www.c4isrnet.com/it-networks/2020/11/20/cia-awards-intel-communitys-cloud-contract-to-several-vendors/

Sur le même sujet

  • Shipyards Not At Risk, Despite DoD Warning It Needs $$ To Save Them

    13 août 2020 | International, Naval

    Shipyards Not At Risk, Despite DoD Warning It Needs $$ To Save Them

    A DoD paper for Congress suggests COVID could shut down shipyards, but Navy officials and analysts say there is little risk. By PAUL MCLEARYon August 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM WASHINGTON: A top Navy official today tried to clarify a Pentagon information paper leaked last week which warned that “at least one” of the seven shipyards that churns out ships for the Navy could close unless Congress handed over billions more to the service. As part of an $11 billion package the Pentagon is requesting from Congress to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the defense industry, the Navy is requesting $4.7 billion in part to ward off the chances “at least one” of the big seven shipyards shutting down. The paper, which has been delivered to lawmakers on Capitol Hill, also warned of over 100,000 lost jobs across shipyards and factories that make aircraft and other weapons for the military. But the Navy's top acquisition executive told reporters today that the wording continued in the paper might leave too much out. “The words could be taken out of context,” James Geurts said. “There probably should be the word ‘temporarily' in there.” If a shipyard started to see a significant portion of its workforce test positive for COVID, “we might have to temporarily close down the shipyard for a period of time until we got it under control. Not that we would have to shut down a shipyard permanently.” The memo contains no such caveats, however. It flatly states a shipyard could close unless the Navy gets the funding boost. Asked where the paper came from, and who it was intended for, DoD spokesman Christopher Sherwood told me via email the department “provided informational material to our oversight committees when asked about the impacts COVID-19 has had on the Defense Industrial Base and our suppliers.” The Navy has gone to great lengths to help its shipyards weather the COVID storm, pumping $130 billion into its supplier base this year in upfront payments, spending that is 25% higher than at this point last year. But some yards have experienced pain keeping to schedule, with uncertain futures ahead as the Navy looks to change its fleet mix in the coming years to better compete with China and Russia. Mark Cancian, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, acknowledged that all Navy shipyards “have a backlog of work, including Bath Iron Works, which was the subject of speculation about closing.” Bath, already six months behind on building seven destroyers in dock, is stumbling to the conclusion of a six-week strike by 4,300 shipbuilders which will likely make those delays even longer. Likewise, the Mississippi-based Austal is looking at the end of the road for its contract to build dozens of aluminum Littoral Combat Ships in a few years, which would likely mark the end of the Navy's interest in buying aluminum hulls. That shipyard “would be at more risk” Cancian said. Neither shipyard is any worse off than the others due to COVID-related shutdowns, however, making the Pentagon's point that yards could shut and require COVID relief funds to keep going, an argument that finds few adherents. There's little doubt COVID is slowing down both ship construction and repair, “but that doesn't mean the Navy doesn't need the ships anymore,” said Bryan Clark of the Hudson Institute. “It just means everything takes longer, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the shipyards are going to close.” Clark noted that while Bath is in a bad spot with delays to its destroyer work that will be compounded by the strike, the Navy still needs it to build destroyers in the future, since relying on Huntington Ingalls as the nation's only shipyard that can build the ships is too risky. Add to that the likelihood that the Navy will move toward buying more numerous small cruisers, unmanned ships, and smaller platforms for Marines and away from small numbers of large destroyers and amphibious ships in the future, means there will be more contracts, and work to go around later this decade. The service is still on track to deliver its much-delayed 30 year shipbuilding plan and force structure assessment this fall, in which several options like a new class of destroyers, a new class of smaller frigates, and smaller hospital ships will all likely find their way into the plans. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/shipyards-not-at-risk-despite-dod-warning-it-needs-money-to-save-them/

  • Marines want a ruggedized robot mule to patrol with and resupply a squad

    2 novembre 2018 | International, Terrestre

    Marines want a ruggedized robot mule to patrol with and resupply a squad

    By: Todd South The Marines want an unmanned vehicle capable of keeping up with its rifle squad and conducting squad resupply to unburden the grunt. A Request For Information recently posted on the Federal Business Opportunitieswebsite keeps options open, telling interested industry partners that the mode could be a “robotic applique” on existing systems, a remote-controlled vehicle or a fully autonomous transport. The system must carry between 500 and 1,000 pounds to outfit up to a 15-Marine unit. While the main objective is for the vehicle to move with the squad through inconsistent terrain, a nice bonus would be if it could manage intra-squad resupply, according to the posting. It must run on rough roads and off road, go for between eight hours and three days, fit inside an MV-22 Osprey when fully loaded, and fit on a light tactical trailer in ground transport. The system also must push out 1- to 3-kW of power to recharge and run squad systems. The Marine Corps Rapid Capabilities Office wants information from industry by Nov. 13. Marines participating in the Advanced Naval Technologies Exercise at Camp Pendleton, California, in May saw vehicles that might fit some of the requirements in operation during urban training sessions. As far back as 2016, Marines were testing a tracked version of the Multi-Utility Tactical Transport, which could carry weapons systems or gear but at a lower rate than this current request. At the time, the MUTT could haul 600 pounds on land and 300 pounds while running amphibious for about 15 miles before power ran down. This latest posting falls closely in line with an existing program in the Army known as Squad Multipurpose Equipment Transport, or SMET. The SMET program has accepted four submissions of similarly capable vehicles for testing by the 10th Mountain Division, 101st Airborne Division and an unidentified Marine unit at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. All four of those submissions are standalone vehicles that use either wheeled or tracked methods of movement. The Army expects to pick the contract winner by 2020 after extensive field tests. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/10/31/marines-want-a-ruggedized-robot-mule-to-patrol-with-and-resupply-a-squad

  • New in 2019: Air Force looks for new bomb designs to fight Russia and China

    4 janvier 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    New in 2019: Air Force looks for new bomb designs to fight Russia and China

    By: Kyle Rempfer A growing cohort of Air Force researchers are arguing that the service needs to undergo a munitions revolution if it is to take on a peer-level adversary in open conflict. “We're developing a range of technologies to enable next-generation and improve precision effects on the battlefield,” Col. Garry Haase, who helms the Air Force Research Lab Munitions Directorate, told an audience at the Air Force Association Annual Conference this fall. In some instances, that will mean more powerful munitions to breach and destroy Russian and Chinese structures in the event of war. “There is now a shift in emphasis away from minimizing to maximizing effects in a high-end fight,” said John Wilcox, vice president of advanced programs and technology at Northrop Grumman, at the conference. “Requirements from our missions directorate say we continue to have to deal with the whole spectrum of threats as we shift to more of a near-peer threat focus,” Wilcox added. “We are looking at larger munitions with bigger effects.” And while neither members of the AFA panel named Russia or China specifically, a recent study by the Mitchell Institute, which is aligned with the Air Force Association, certainly did. In the document, titled “The Munition Effects Revolution," several retired senior Air Force officers argue that the U.S. munitions arsenal is overdue for a shakeup. “The bomb body, a steel shell filled with explosive material, is relatively unchanged across the past 100 years," the study reads. "But some elements of modern munitions have significantly evolved—particularly guidance elements. Munition effects—the destructive envelope of heat, blast, and fragmentation—remain essentially unchanged.” High demand for combat aircraft is a key driver behind the need for enhanced munitions options, according to the Mitchell Institute. “The Air Force is currently operating the smallest and oldest aircraft force in its history,” the study reads. “Additionally, current mission capable rates are low and pilots are in increasingly short supply. To best meet combatant command requirements amidst these constraints, it is crucial to ensure each sortie flown and every bomb dropped yields maximum potential.” https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/01/03/new-in-2019-air-force-looks-for-new-bomb-designs-to-fight-russia-and-china

Toutes les nouvelles